Vida En Shalom
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813952763
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Portland, ME, USA
- Phone
- 2069395442
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $62,363
- Expenses
- $50,759
- Assets
- $18,561
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mark Baker (President)
People named in this filing
- Mark Baker (President)
- Samuel Dahlin (Treasurer)
- Julia Baker (Co-Secretary)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of Vida en Shalom is to promote holistic liberating ministry centered on Jesus Christ amongst marginalized and under-resourced people.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, Vida en Shalom partnered with 8 churches or organizations in Honduras to promote holistic liberating ministry centered on Jesus Christ amongst marginalized and under-resourced people. Measurable results of financial support given by Vida en Shalom include, but are not limited to: seed capital to 16 entrepreneurs to start small business (CASM), half of the salary for the pastor of a barrio church (VAF) enabling the church to have a full-time pastor, 21 children received weekly music lessons through Iglesia en Transformación, 100 families received food aid and 3 days a week 40 families of patients in the La Ceiba public hospital received meals through programs of Iglesia Amor Viviente.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 98.9%; rating input score 99
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.6%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 98.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.